I made the same arguments on another site and couldn't convince atheists there. Maybe I'll have better luck here . . . OR NOT !

1) The existence of the universe demands an explanation. The order of the physical universe which ensures it adheres to laws which can be inferred suggests an intelligence behind the universe.

2) The genetic code in living organisms precludes the possibility they arose naturally. Natural processes CAN'T give rise to codes which don't follow natural laws. As humans, we know that codes are always made by conscious effort so the presence of codes in living things is grounds to infer that God exists.

3) Consciousness in man is not explainable by materialistic means. Emergence can't explain consciousness since typically it deals with new physical properties that arise due to complex interactions. But the consciousness isn't physical and so can't be explained by purely material means moreso since physical things lack consciousness. This is good grounds to believe that a God that effects consciousness exists.

Lol.
You have already made these fallacious sunday school arguments many times before.

Maybe if you repeat them more often, then by dint of faith, they may become your own truth.

However, by repeating these lame, logically inconsistent pseudo arguments, you seem to be desperately seeking for a REASON to believe in the existence of god.

UyiIredia:
I made the same arguments on another site and couldn't convince atheists there. Maybe I'll have better luck here . . . OR NOT !

Oh really then you need the luck....Goodluck with that.

UyiIredia:

1) The existence of the universe demands an explanation. The order of the physical universe which ensures it adheres to laws which can be inferred suggests an intelligence behind the universe.

oh yea the universe needs an explanation and this can only be achieved through study, observation and experiment, no matter how long it takes to solve this not with assumptions (a god did it).
Throwing in a god did it when you lack knowledge of how it happened;
This does not solve this problem because u are trying to explain something that is unexplained with an unexplained answer if this should hold sway then we can also say the universe doesn't need to be explained.

This "god did it" does not answer the question it only postpones it, u have to assume a god don't need a creator, don't this show the universe too don't need a creator since u just showed something can exist without a creator

You mention the order in the PHYSICAL universe and NATURAL laws then u assumed up a SPIRITUAL answer to something u agree is PHYSICAL this itself is a flaw to itself. (Self refuting)

UyiIredia:

2) The genetic code in living organisms precludes the possibility they arose naturally. Natural processes CAN'T give rise to codes which don't follow natural laws. As humans, we know that codes are always made by conscious effort so the presence of codes in living things is grounds to infer that God exists.

the bolded alone kills this argument. You distance the human genetic code from nature and claim it doesn't follow natural laws. How can genetic code/hereditary not be natural when it is still within the confine of nature and are found in natural organisms.
This is a big intellectually epileptic assertion and I have no advice than you need more studies.

UyiIredia:

3) Consciousness in man is not explainable by materialistic means. Emergence can't explain consciousness since typically it deals with new physical properties that arise due to complex interactions. But the consciousness isn't physical and so can't be explained by purely material means moreso since physical things lack consciousness. This is good grounds to believe that a God that effects consciousness exists.

Man's consciousness cannot be explained materially when man's consciousness is still material....lol... Funny.

For this to hold sway you have to then explain to us god's consciousness and bear in mind this explanation should not be spiritual since you argue that man (material entity) does not have material origin then god(spiritual entity) cannot have spiritual origin, it must be something else...
Material must have material origin cus that which is not material cannot give what it doesnt have

If you assume god is self existent this is another failing in your argument because you have showed something can be self existent why then would you assume up a creator for the universe since following your argument we can rightly say it is self existent.

Again good luck

come on Uyi, you're better than this

but really christianity is seriously sucking you dry

am yet to see a convincing rebuttal against the points op made

for johnydon22

1.if not a greater force/power/being that is existing independently of other beings or causes is responsible , then present a much better explanation .And not just 'refuting his claims'.

2. Let this explain >. http://www.ucg.org/vertical-thought/hey-hey-dna-proving-gods-existence-genetically

3. There are much more apart from consciousness ... creativity , moral values , social behavior , habitual nature ,power of decision , high intelligence , skills etc . Can you explain why man , according to you as an evolutionist , who supposedly evolved from lower life forms cannot be matched in these areas of life as mentioned by other animals who also evolved from lower life forms alongside man . Why is man so distinct in these mentioned areas?

Until you tell me who created your so-called god then am not convince

plaetton:
Lol.
You have already made these fallacious sunday school arguments many times before.

Maybe if you repeat them more often, then by dint of faith, they may become your own truth.

However, by repeating these lame, logically inconsistent pseudo arguments, you seem to be desperately seeking for a REASON to believe in the existence of god.

the only brilliant atheist and over billion of christians are less interlingent. One thing for sure the universe has a caused then an uncaused, personal Creator of the universe exists, who sans the universe is beginningless, changeless, immaterial, timeless, spaceless, and powerful.

kolajamesjnr:
Until you tell me who created your so-called god then am not convince

God is self-existent

When "God" is said , basic descriptions of Him should come to mind

→ Supreme Being
→ Creator
→Wonder worker
→ Highly intelligent being

If these are understood , then you have no problem . Can this be proven outside the bible? Yes and BASICALLY

→Existence , Design and Complexity of life forms
→Miracles
→Effects of His Power on Nature
→Personal Experiences

I mentioned this somewhere --- https://www.nairaland.com/2285941/atheism-religion-kolooyinbo-explains/5#33380518

KingEbukasBlog:
am yet to see a convincing rebuttal against the points op made

for johnydon22

1.if not a greater force/power/being that is existing independently of other beings or causes is responsible , then present a much better explanation .And not just 'refuting his claims'.

Maybe you failed to read my post well cus if you had you would heard where i said. . . " oh yea the universe needs an explanation and this can only be achieved
through study, observation and experiment, no matter how long it takes to
solve this not with assumptions (a god did it).
Throwing in a god did it when you lack knowledge of how it happened;
This does not solve this problem because u are trying to explain
something that is unexplained with an unexplained answer if this should
hold sway then we can also say the universe doesn't need to be explained.…

For you to assume a greater force/power/being that exists independently of any other beings or causes then i can rightly say the universe is practically independent of this independently existing power (which exists where?)

KingEbukasBlog:

2. Im not that good in biology, so let this explain >. http://www.ucg.org/vertical-thought/hey-hey-dna-proving-gods-existence-genetically

And i am supposed to reply a website link here?. . If you are not that good in biology how then did you know the website explanation was correct.

KingEbukasBlog:

3. There are much more apart from consciousness ... creativity , moral values , social behavior , habitual nature ,power of decision , high intelligence , skills etc . Can you explain why man , according to you as an evolutionist , who supposedly evolved from lower life forms cannot be matched in these areas of life as mentioned by other animals . Why is man so distinct in these mentioned areas?

And all that are as a result of highly developed complex brain..

Secondly i have not claimed to be an evolutionist, I say "I don't know how anything began" Evolution is a branch of study in science as we all know more studies are going on this and only through these studies can the real eventuality be uncovered like i clearly asserted above.

For your question; I think answering this question evolutionarily as you have dragged it into, it should be termed an evolved trait of intellect.
(Evolutionary Assertion) The Humanoid Australopithecus was far less intelligent than what you term other animals, Adipithecus also possessed a far less developed brain and intellect which kept evolving during the stages of the evolutionary trail (Adipithecus Ramidus, Aferensis, Africanus down to the homos)

This assertion of evolved intellect, morals, behaviours can even be demonstrated. . . Take a look back 2000years ago, 4000years ago and then compare that with now. . . I think it is clear the intellectual and social behaviour of now is far more different from then this shows it improves with time. (evolved means development)

Speaking of other animals; Termites built cities and had more civilized societies far before humans did. . .

johnydon22:
Maybe you failed to read my post well cus if you had you would heard where i said. . . " oh yea the universe needs an explanation and this can only be achieved
through study, observation and experiment, no matter how long it takes to
solve this not with assumptions (a god did it).
Throwing in a god did it when you lack knowledge of how it happened;
This does not solve this problem because u are trying to explain
something that is unexplained with an unexplained answer if this should
hold sway then we can also say the universe doesn't need to be explained.…

For you to assume a greater force/power/being that exists independently of any other beings or causes then i can rightly say the universe is practically independent of this independently existing power (which exists where?)

prove @ bolded , dont just make assertions without proof . Can you prove the universe is self-existent ?

And i am supposed to reply a website link here?. . If you are not that good in biology how then did you know the website explanation was correct.

ok in other words , I could not summarize with every detail I wanted you to see , so I directed to the link . I have seen you do it too so this isn't new

And all that are as a result of highly developed complex brain..

Secondly i have not claimed to be an evolutionist, I say "I don't know how anything began" Evolution is a branch of study in science as we all know more studies are going on this and only through these studies can the real eventuality be uncovered like i clearly asserted above.

For your question; I think answering this question evolutionarily as you have dragged it into, it should be termed an evolved trait of intellect.
(Evolutionary Assertion) The Humanoid Australopithecus was far less intelligent than what you term other animals, Adipithecus also possessed a far less developed brain and intellect which kept evolving during the stages of the evolutionary trail (Adipithecus Ramidus, Aferensis, Africanus down to the homos)

This assertion of evolved intellect, morals, behaviours can even be demonstrated. . . Take a look back 2000years ago, 4000years ago and then compare that with now. . . I think it is clear the intellectual and social behaviour of now is far more different from then this shows it improves with time. (evolved means development)

Speaking of other animals; Termites built cities and had more civilized societies far before humans did. . .

lol ... this is funny tho... you explained how not why

KingEbukasBlog:


God is self-existent

And it begs the question; How did you get to know?

How can you assert something is self-existent then turn around and maintain the universe must need a creator then?

if anything can be self-existent, then rightly put the universe (a proven existent entity) can then be said to be self-existent.

KingEbukasBlog:

When "God" is said , basic descriptions of Him should come to mind

→ Supreme Being
→ Creator
→Wonder worker
→ Highly intelligent being

Man fits into these descriptions too. . but somehow man needs a creator but a more complex being dont. ..really

KingEbukasBlog:

If these are understood , then you have no problem . Can this be proven outside the bible? Yes and BASICALLY

→Existence , Design and Complexity of life forms

This only proves the existence of life forms and universe not an invisible alleged creator. Complexity, Yes. . Design? I wonder how chaotic activities, galaxies colliding on galaxies, asteroids crashing down on planets, tsunamis, earth quakes are a form of design.

@bolded..So Life forms are complex therefore require a creator, but you are here arguing that a more superior and complex life form than what we have here dont need a creator..Isnt that failing in ur argument?
A far more complex life form dont need a creator but a simpler complex must have a creator in order to exist..

KingEbukasBlog:

→Miracles

A video of an amputated limb grow back?

KingEbukasBlog:

→Effects of His Power on Nature

Like?

KingEbukasBlog:

→Personal Experiences

Every other person claims this and arrive at different conclusions. . Are you all experiencing the same entity here or just yourselves.

KingEbukasBlog:

I mentioned this somewhere

ok

KingEbukasBlog:


prove @ bolded , dont just make assertions without proof . Can you prove the universe is self-existent ?

I have never asserted anything to the universe i use your argument against you... and the bolded clearly stated
If you assume a creator who is self existent then you have shown something can be self existent then i can say the universe is self existent

Am sure it was very simply put and clear i boomeranged your argument unless u are reading the back of your phone.

KingEbukasBlog:

ok in other words , I could not summarize with every detail I wanted you to see , so I directed to the link . I have seen you do it too so this isn't knew

Ok then

KingEbukasBlog:

lol ... this is funny tho... you explained how not why

why did we develop from cave dwellers to sky scraper habiting beings?, maybe you would ask me next to explain why you see with your eyes and not your nose..?

johnydon22:
And it begs the question; How did you get to know?

How can you assert something is self-existent then turn around and maintain the universe must need a creator then?

if anything can be self-existent, then rightly put the universe (a proven existent entity) can then be said to be self-existent.
Man fits into these descriptions too. . but somehow man needs a creator but a more complex being dont. ..really

This only proves the existence of life forms and universe not an invisible alleged creator. Complexity, Yes. . Design? I wonder how chaotic activities, galaxies colliding on galaxies, asteroids crashing down on planets, tsunamis, earth quakes are a form of design.

@bolded.. Life forms are complex therefore require a creator, but you are here arguing that a more superior and complex life form than what we have here dont need a creator..Isnt that failing in ur argument?


A far more complex life form dont need a creator but a simpler complex must have a creator in order to exist.

I started with self-existent ... so clearly I wasn't failing my argument

A video of an amputated limb grow back?

So clearly , others are true but you badly an amputated limb grow back

Like?

Noah's flood

[b]Every other person claims this and arrive at different conclusions. . Are you all experiencing the same entity here or just yourselves.

give me names

johnydon22:
I have never asserted anything to the universe i use your argument against you... and the bolded clearly stated
If you assume a creator who is self existent then you have shown something can be self existent then i can say the universe is self existent

Am sure it was very simply put and clear i boomeranged your argument unless u are reading the back of your phone.

so your point is we cannot say God created the universe , neither can we say He didn't
Ok then

why did we develop from cave dwellers to sky scraper habiting beings?, maybe you would ask me next to explain why you see with your eyes and not your nose..?

we get better everyday(evolution - not developing from lower life forms) ... Haven't termites built sky scrapers and cars yet?

KingEbukasBlog:

I started with self-existent ... so clearly I wasn't failing my argument

And by so doing why then do you maintain the universe must be created?
since you are agree something can be self existent, why not the universe?

KingEbukasBlog:

So clearly , others are true but you badly an amputated limb grow back

I have watched emmanuel t.v enough to know there is no difference between nollywood and that stuff.

I have seen a video of Christ embassy where a man allegedly blind from birth regained his sight and identified the colour red, how come

we need something that cannot be faked, so just an amputated limb growing back will be enough am sure god can do it, after all nothing is impossible for him eehm

KingEbukasBlog:

Noah's flood

Yeah i suppose Gilgamesh flood story is truer then

KingEbukasBlog:

give me names

Islam, christianity (41,000), hinduism, satanism, judaism, sikhism, bahai, semitic neopeganism. . . I could keep counting.

KingEbukasBlog:


so your point is we cannot say God created the universe , neither can we say He didn't
Ok then

My point as i have stated from the beginning is; Assuming up a creator does not answer the questions on the origin of the universe cus the creator then becomes a subject to questions about its own existence...

With persistent study, observation, experiments, humans can answer these questions with time like we have answered many others.

KingEbukasBlog:

we get better everyday(evolution - not developing from lower life forms) ... Haven't termites built sky scrapers and cars yet?

Evolution means development (Sure you know am not an evolutionist) But this development can be observed in an Arctic fox is different from an ordinary fox. . Develop features to suit and adapt.

Comparing the size of some ant hills to the size of termites, its basically clear its more or less a sky scraper.

If i can recall correctly termites acquire more colonies through nocturnal flights (winged termites perform this) They fly. . . so means of transportation, solved

plaetton:
Lol.
You have already made these fallacious sunday school arguments many times before.

Maybe if you repeat them more often, then by dint of faith, they may become your own truth.

However, by repeating these lame, logically inconsistent pseudo arguments, you seem to be desperately seeking for a REASON to believe in the existence of god.

This is not a rebuttal of anything in the OP and nothing in the OP remotely suggests any "Sunday School" teaching whatever.
I would like to hope that you are aware enough to understand what a premise is, and what conclusions may derive: and I certainly further hope that you have not become so lazy in your approach that it suffices to brand an argument "Sunday School" in order to successfully or reasonably rebut it.

You should probably try your hands on the argument he made on consciousness. Start with that, if you will.

KingEbukasBlog:
2. Im not that good in biology, so let this explain >. http://www.ucg.org/vertical-thought/hey-hey-dna-proving-gods-existence-genetically

Lmao, this is funny. If you're not good in Biology, why then would you link anyone to an article with not even one citation to a science paper and worst of all, written by a Pastor.

Even someone in the comments said...

Such a disappointing article. Inaccurate information. We are just handing this over to the evolutionists! I’m very disappointed.

johnydon22:
And by so doing why then do you maintain the universe must be created?
since you are agree something can be self existent, why not the universe?

God is a
→ Supreme Being
→ Creator
→Wonder worker
→ Highly intelligent being
These are basic characteristics of Him every Christian knows . If obviously he performs wonders/miracles in our lives , seen we are created in his image , and have witnessed how He got us through problems . So why shouldn't we see Him as the creator of the universe?

I have watched emmanuel t.v enough to know there is no difference between nollywood and that stuff.

I have seen a video of Christ embassy where a man allegedly blind from birth regained his sight and identified the colour red, how come

I believe you bro

we need something that cannot be faked, so just an amputated limb growing back will be enough am sure god can do it, after all nothing is impossible for him eehm

faith ?

Yeah i suppose Gilgamesh flood story is truer then

I suppose cavemen stories of women being physically weak because they took care of the kids in the caves are not true then

Islam, christianity (41,000), hinduism, satanism, judaism, sikhism, bahai, semitic neopeganism. . . I could keep counting.

strange names of people

KingEbukasBlog:

God is a
→ Supreme Being
→ Creator
→Wonder worker
→ Highly intelligent being
These are basic characteristics of Him every Christian knows . If obviously he performs wonders/miracles in our lives , seen we are created in his image , and have witnessed how got us through problems . So why shouldn't we see Him as the creator of the universe?

Ooh mehn this again?. . . Should we start all over again.. Now that would be circular...

I believe you bro

LOL...its obvious.... So we need something better just a video an amputated limb grow, god is a wonder worker am sure he can do it

.... Thanks in advance for the video.

KingEbukasBlog:

faith ?

Your faith doesn't make anything true, it doesnt even make it probably true, that i have faith that i am harry potter doesnt make it true...Faith has no weight on reality.
That you have faith only means you can believe anything true or not.

Meanwhile you dont need faith to know an aeroplane can fly. You are certain (sure) of it, so it doesn't require faith.

KingEbukasBlog:

I suppose cavemen stories of women being physically weak because they took care of the kids in the caves are not true then

Hahahahahaha am sure you know i dont share that ideology of women being weak.

Simple question .. Gilgamesh flood story and Noah flood story, which predates the other?

KingEbukasBlog:

strange names of people

Am sure names like Muoka, pope francis, muhammed, tb joshua, is not hard to see

johnydon22:

Ooh mehn this again?. . . Should we start all over again.. Now that would be circular...

LOL...its obvious.... So we need something better just a video an amputated limb grow, god is a wonder worker am sure he can do it

.... Thanks in advance for the video.

Your faith doesn't make anything true, it doesnt even make it probably true, that i have faith that i am harry potter doesnt make it true...Faith has no weight on reality.
That you have faith only means you can believe anything true or not.

Meanwhile you dont need faith to know an aeroplane can fly. You are certain (sure) of it, so it doesn't require faith.

Am arguing about faith with an atheist ... ok

Hahahahahaha am sure you know i dont share that ideology of women being weak.

its biologically proven

Simple question .. Gilgamesh flood story and Noah flood story, which predates the other?

Effects of God's Power on Nature - Noah's flood . Its obvious watcha doing

Am sure names like Muoka, pope francis, tb joshua, is not hard to see

muhammed is the GO of which church?

KingEbukasBlog:









Am arguing about faith with an atheist ... ok

Ok..lol..

its biologically proven

Lol.. until you get your butts kicked by one, we will see. .

Am eager to learn, give me a scientific citation of your assertion...

KingEbukasBlog:

Effects of God's Power on Nature - Noah's flood . Its obvious watcha doing

Uuuhm my question was, Gilgamesh flood story and Noah's flood story, which one predates the other... Just a simple question..

KingEbukasBlog:

muhammed is the GO of which church?

He is the founder of Islam and he experienced his own differently which was why i pointed out different religions at first. . . Nawa ooo

[quote author=johnydon22 post=34378703] My point as i have stated from the beginning is; Assuming up a creator does not answer the questions on the origin of the universe cus the creator then becomes a subject to questions about its own existence...

With persistent study, observation, experiments, humans can answer these questions with time like we have answered many others.

answered which?
[quote]Evolution means development (Sure you know am not an evolutionist) But this development can be observed in an Arctic fox is different from an ordinary fox. . Develop features to suit and adapt.

there are animals who experience the same weather conditions and changes in the environment as man ... so why dont they "Develop features to suit and adapt" thus looking like man

Comparing the size of some ant hills to the size of termites, its basically clear its more or less a sky scraper.

If i can recall correctly termites acquire more colonies through nocturnal flights (winged termites perform this) They fly. . . so means of transportation, solved

man has legs , hands but he built cars , air crafts for better transportation and movement .. since termites showed some level of 'civilization' before man, why didnt they improve on that ... its all about evolution right?

KingEbukasBlog:
answered which?

Many things, Like Identifying others planets and solar systems, what causes rains, why we experience season changes, its packed in your Physics, Chemistry and Biology text books. do i even need to go on??. . . . Am really surprised a 21st century homo sapiens asked this question..

there are animals who experience the same weather conditions and
changes in the environment as man ... so why dont they "Develop features
to suit and adapt" thus looking like man

WTF Well you have said you are not knowledgeable in biology so this is quite understandable...
Fox is in the family [size=20]Canidae[/size] while man is in the family [size=20] Hominidae[/size] Take a look at other Homindaes and see the similarities between them
The enlarged is enough answer to this.

man has legs , hands but he built cars , air crafts for better transportation
and movement .. since termites showed some level of 'civilization' before
man, why didnt they improve on that ... its all about evolution right?

I suppose as usual you drag us back and again this where this my post will still again suffice as an answer

[b][size=20] And all that are as a result of highly developed complex brain..[/size]

Secondly i have not claimed to be an evolutionist, I say "I don't know
how anything began" Evolution is a branch of study in science as we all
know more studies are going on this and only through these studies can
the real eventuality be uncovered like i clearly asserted above.

For your question; I think answering this question evolutionarily as you
have dragged it into, it should be termed an evolved trait of intellect.
(Evolutionary Assertion) The Humanoid Australopithecus was far less
intelligent than what you term other animals, Adipithecus also
possessed a far less developed brain and intellect which kept evolving
during the stages of the evolutionary trail (Adipithecus Ramidus,
Aferensis, Africanus down to the homos)

This assertion of evolved intellect, morals, behaviours can even be
demonstrated. . . Take a look back 2000years ago, 4000years ago and
then compare that with now. . . I think it is clear the intellectual and
social behaviour of now is far more different from then this shows it
improves with time. (evolved means development)[/b]

Pay mind to the enlarged again.

johnydon22:

Ok..lol..

Lol.. until you get your butts kicked by one, we will see. .

iffahear

Am eager to learn, give me a scientific citation of your assertion...

you've started again ... isnt it obvious I dont want to before id be labelled a misogynist

Uuuhm my question was, Gilgamesh flood story and Noah's flood story, which one predates the other... Just a simple question..

I gave Noah's flood story , according to the bible , as an example of an effect of God's power on nature not the Gilgamesh flood story ... whatever you are trying to do will not work

He is the founder of Islam and he experienced his own differently which was why i pointed out different religions at first. . . Nawa ooo

Im talking about Christianity... wetin concern me with other religions

KingEbukasBlog:

iffahear

I dont think much more needs saying on this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcBTKZ9-QkE

And right in my street, there is a particular woman that beats up her husband.

you've started again ... isnt it obvious I dont want to before id before labelled a misogynist

I said am eager to learn, that i need a scientific citation where you got your analogy that its biologically proven women are weaker... Science is study bro, i want to learn it

I gave Noah's flood story , according to the bible , as an example of an effect of God's power on nature not the Gilgamesh flood story ... whatever you are trying to do will not work

..LOL.. I wouldn't want to outrightly call the biblical fable a myth so you wont blow up. . . That's why i presented an older similar fable (more than a 1000years difference) from mesopotamia (Gilgamesh flood story) And asked you to pick the older one.

Am sure you are just dodging cus you know if you say Gilgamesh story is older, it shows the bible tale to be a copied myth but yet you cannot say the Noah fable is older cus you know its not..... I understand the dodging

Im talking about Christianity... wetin concern me with other religions

and i was talking about every religion claiming to have experienced theirs, you asked for names and i gave you names

johnydon22:

Many things, Like Identifying others planets and solar systems, what causes rains, why we experience season changes, its packed in your Physics, Chemistry and Biology text books. do i even need to go on??. . . . Am really surprised a 21st century homo sapiens asked this question..



WTF Well you have said you are not knowledgeable in biology so this is quite understandable...
Fox is in the family [size=20]Canidae[/size] while man is in the family [size=20] Hominidae[/size] Take a look at other Homindaes and see the similarities between them
The enlarged is enough answer to this.


I suppose as usual you drag us back and again this where this my post will still again suffice as an answer

ode ... I know all those things ... you are blowing the statement I made out of proportion

[b][size=20] And all that are as a result of highly developed complex brain..[/size]

Secondly i have not claimed to be an evolutionist, I say "I don't know
how anything began" Evolution is a branch of study in science as we all
know more studies are going on this and only through these studies can
the real eventuality be uncovered like i clearly asserted above.

For your question; I think answering this question evolutionarily as you
have dragged it into, it should be termed an evolved trait of intellect.
(Evolutionary Assertion) The Humanoid Australopithecus was far less
intelligent than what you term other animals, Adipithecus also
possessed a far less developed brain and intellect which kept evolving
during the stages of the evolutionary trail (Adipithecus Ramidus,
Aferensis, Africanus down to the homos)

This assertion of evolved intellect, morals, behaviours can even be
demonstrated. . . Take a look back 2000years ago, 4000years ago and
then compare that with now. . . I think it is clear the intellectual and
social behaviour of now is far more different from then this shows it
improves with time. (evolved means development)[/b]

Pay mind to the enlarged again.

Please John you support the theory of evolution means you are an evolutionist

KingEbukasBlog:

ode ... I know all those things ... you are blowing the statement I made out of proportion

And somehow someone who claims to know them still ask why Canidae doesnt look like hominidae. . . Thats funny you know..

Its not time for name calling.
Ode?? Uuhm i wouldn't call me that...

And ode in igbo means Writer **Ode Akwukwo** Click my profile to read one of my stories.

Please John you support the theory of evolution means you are an evolutionist

Nope, its about teaching you exactly what evolution says not let you misrepresent it when you have not read it.

Evolution is a branch of study in science, that i dont still quite agree i know how life formed because i think humans still have a lot more study to do on it... That doesnt mean i shouldn't show you what it says when you drag it into a discussion with me..

johnydon22:
I dont think much more needs saying on this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcBTKZ9-QkE

And right in my street, there is a particular woman that beats up her husband.
I said am eager to learn, that i need a scientific citation where you got your analogy that its biologically proven women are weaker... Science is study bro, i want to learn it

you can carry out the research you wont hear it from me

..LOL.. I wouldn't want to outrightly call the biblical fable a myth so you wont blow up. . . That's why i presented an older similar fable (more than a 1000years difference) from mesopotamia (Gilgamesh flood story) And asked you to pick the older one.

Am sure you are just dodging cus you know if you say Gilgamesh story is older, it shows the bible tale to be a copied myth but yet you cannot say the Noah fable is older cus you know its not..... I understand the dodging

remember , the earth is not six thousand years old And not all historic events were recorded . Nevertheless ,ancient writings talk about a universal flood.

and i was talking about every religion claiming to have experienced theirs, you asked for names and i gave you names

Obviously I asked about names in Christianty

KingEbukasBlog:


you can carry out the research you wont hear it from me

Aaaaaw bro thats not a good way to back up your assertion ..

remember , the earth is not six thousand years old And not all historic events were recorded . Nevertheless ,ancient writings talk about a universal flood.

. . So then you agree the Noah story was a copy and reworked version since other older versions came with different names, settings and style

Obviously I asked about names in Christianty

Ok then you are a christian thats not hard for you to identify... Or at least go with the three i mentioned with muhammed remove the muhammed..

DeepSight:


This is not a rebuttal of anything in the OP and nothing in the OP remotely suggests any "Sunday School" teaching whatever.
I would like to hope that you are aware enough to understand what a premise is, and what conclusions may derive: and I certainly further hope that you have not become so lazy in your approach that it suffices to brand an argument "Sunday School" in order to successfully or reasonably rebut it.

You should probably try your hands on the argument he made on consciousness. Start with that, if you will.

My point is that these arguments of his have been debated and shredded on this forum by me and others on at least two previous occasions.

What is exactly the motive for bringing same previously repudiated arguments here again?
That's why I call it sunday school arguments. They lack merit. They are based on unproven assumptions, bold statements of faith, and undefined terms.
There is no logically consistent arguments to be seen here.

johnydon22:
And somehow someone who claims to know them still ask why Canidae doesnt look like hominidae. . . Thats funny you know..

I know about biological classifications

According to evolutionists , the process brought about families ... yes or no? . But as a christian , I know God created living things but man through science divided them because of similar features they posses

Its not time for name calling.
Ode?? Uuhm i wouldn't call me that...

And ode in igbo means Writer **Ode Akwukwo** Click my profile to read one of my stories.

It was a joke , please dont take it seriously ...
Coolval? lover boy ! ave saved it and will read it in the evening

Nope, its about teaching you exactly what evolution says not let you misrepresent it when you have not read it.

Evolution is a branch of study in science, that i dont still quite agree i know how life formed because i think humans still have a lot more study to do on it... That doesnt mean i shouldn't show you what it says when you drag it into a discussion with me..

lol either way as far as you use it to describe or explain how life was formed then you support it . Am surprised you are even arguing about this